Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KKO 1610/2022 Generato dall'IA

Insurance company withdrawal of appeal leads to dismissal of insured's liability for fire damage caused by cannabis cultivation.

Numero d'incarto KKO 1610/2022
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Finlandia (FI)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Respinto (Dismissed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Supreme Court dismissed the insurance company's claim against the insured for fire damage resulting from cannabis cultivation. Although the lower courts had ruled that the insured was liable for the fire caused by a grow lamp, the insurance company voluntarily withdrew its appeal to the Supreme Court. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the lower court judgments and held that the insured was not liable.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Insurance Act 1991, Chapter 1, Section 1; Insurance Contract Act 1991, Chapter 1, Section 1: Where the insurer or the opposing party in an insurance liability dispute withdraws their appeal to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court must set aside the lower court judgments and dismiss the claim.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
insurance liability fire damage cannabis cultivation withdrawal of appeal Supreme Court procedure civil liability dismissal of claim fondamento dell'azione

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Insurance Act 1991, Chapter 1, Section 1
Insurance Contract Act 1991, Chapter 1, Section 1
Generato dall'IA
kko-other_1995_2224
Supreme Court dismissed claim for damages against insurer based on criminal conviction and insurance contract terms.
kko-precedent_2009_55
Supreme Court allows insurance company to file counterclaim on unappealed crime charge despite limited original appeal scope.
kko-precedent_2014_21
Supreme Court dismisses insurance claim where insured concealed true asset value to claim excessive fraud-based damages.
appeal_1986_rovaniemi__297
Court allows claim for additional costs without formal objection when tied to same insurance event as objected claim.
kko-precedent_1987_66
Supreme Court dismisses appeal; driver loses claim against insurer and must pay litigation costs per Traffic Insurance Act.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

A oli tuomittu törkeästä huumausainerikoksesta sillä perusteella, että hän oli kasvattanut kannabiskasveja vuokraamassaan omakotitalossa. Kasvattamisessa apuna käytetystä kasvatuslampusta oli syttynyt tulipalo. Vakuutusyhtiö oli käräjäoikeudessa vaatinut A:n velvoittamista korvaamaan omakotitalon omistajalle tulipalon johdosta maksamansa vakuutuskorvauksen. Käräjäoikeus oli tuominnut vakuutuskorvausta maksettavaksi. A:n valitettua korvausvelvollisuudesta hovioikeus ei muuttanut käräjäoikeuden tuomiota.

Kun muutoksenhakija A:n vastapuoli vakuutusyhtiö luopui Korkeimmassa oikeudessa vaatimuksestaan, hovioikeuden ja käräjäoikeuden tuomiot kumottiin ja vaatimus hylättiin.